22 July 2010

before i speak, i have something important to say

[click image]

.

I. Hate. To. Be. The. Kind. Who. Says. I. Told. You. So. But. I. Told. You. So.

.

Also foreseen....

Who needs a frickin crystal ball?

.

Another breathtakingly fine example of nobrainertude for all psychics....
U.S. attorney firing ruled political

WASHINGTON, July 22 (UPI) — A special prosecutor ruled that the firing of a U.S. attorney in 2006, while politically motivated, didn't warrant criminal charges being filed.

Special prosecutor Nora Dannehy spent nearly two years investigating whether the firing of U.S. attorney David Iglesias in New Mexico broke the law and whether Justice Department officials lied to Congress about it, touching off a scandal that hounded President George W. Bush's administration and spurred the resignation of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, The New York Times reported Wednesday.

Dannehy determined that Iglesias's firing was politically motivated, which violated Justice Department principles, but wasn't criminal, and concluded that misleading statements Gonzales and other Justice Department officials made to Congress didn't rise to a criminal level, an investigation summary sent to Congress by the Justice Department indicated.

An investigation by the Justice Department's inspector general and Office of Professional Responsibility that wrapped up in September 2008 found at least three of the nine firings of U.S. attorneys were politically motivated. The report said it found Iglesias's firing particularly troubling because there were indications he was let go because he wouldn't bring criminal charges involving accusations of voter fraud and Democrats before the 2006 elections.

Dannehy, appointed by then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey to investigate, distinguished between firing Iglesias for political reasons and doing so to influence an investigation that could harm Democrats, which would be illegal, the Times said.

"The weight of the evidence established not an attempt to influence but rather an attempt to remove David Iglesias from office, in other words, to eliminate the possibility of any future action or inaction by him," the summary said.
Maybe I will just keep listing these until YOU go screaming naked off a cliff....

.

11 comments:

  1. Ah...my favorite Rickyism "I fuckin' Itodaso."

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnOcycgXpms


    If you haven't seen Trailer Park Boys start with "Steve French"

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm waiting for the duck to drop!

    ReplyDelete
  3. It won't come till you least expect it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That's why I'm still waiting...

    ReplyDelete
  5. The next breaking news item will be that they've decided to do away with the judicial branch of government.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I mean, just take a look at the agencies under DHS. FUCK! Those asswipes at WaPo think they have a hot story. I don't know about everyone ELSE, but I've been hip to this horror for YEARS... and we don't need no stinkin' judiciary anymore. Summary execution is legal. Fuck the justice system. Just bogs things down. No! Let's do this RIGHT! No more courts. Megadeath on the Gulf, and if we're "lucky", East, coasts. Poor people packed in crates and stacked in some warehouse north of the Brooks Range... in case we need some free range DNA someday. And food-flavored plastic for anyone without a KMA card. Now THAT is the way to run this country.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh, oh! I fergot to mention about OUTLAWING thinking.

    Major pain in the butt.

    ONLY leads to trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm not sure why this was even news worth since what happened in the end was decided in the beginning. Just more business as usual.
    jo6pac

    ReplyDelete
  9. Shhhhh, the plebes might hear you and become restless.

    ReplyDelete
  10. they've decided to do away with the judicial branch of government.

    I thought they already had...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Well, yes, right you are....

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.